bullyfandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:McJeff/Archive6
User talk:McJeff/Archive1 *User talk:McJeff/Archive2 *User talk:McJeff/Archive3 *User talk:McJeff/Archive4 *User talk:McJeff/Archive5 99.7.44.130 He apparently wants to come back and edit here. He is willing to edit with in the rules and learn about editing first. I'd be willing to let him back to edit on a trial basis and see how he does. What is your opinion dude? Dan the Man 1983 01:46, 20 January 2009 (UTC) :By trial basis, I mean unblock him and see how he does, the next violation he pulls though, he is blocked again. Dan the Man 1983 01:47, 20 January 2009 (UTC) ::I gave up on him because I honestly think he is too stupid to handle editing. Remember I'm the one that bent over backwards to try and help him fit in on the wiki. If you want to try and mentor him feel free, but I recommend against it. McJeff 01:59, 20 January 2009 (UTC) :::No I won't mentor him, but I will just guide him to the help section and tell him to read it all before editing. The first violation and he is out. Dan the Man 1983 02:11, 20 January 2009 (UTC) ::::I have gave him a 2 week trial basis to see how he does. At the end of 2 weeks, me and you could talk on AIM and determine whether he stays or goes. Dan the Man 1983 02:16, 20 January 2009 (UTC) Reply. Get well soon dude and have some good rest. I will hold the fort here if you don't come on. Dan the Man 1983 12:55, 21 January 2009 (UTC) Mystery Jocks Reply I always thought he resembled Bo in looks more then he did Damon. I have always said it to. If you remember, I even made a topic about it back at Wikipedia. Dan the Man 1983 18:57, 21 January 2009 (UTC) :Yup, and you were right. I thought Bo had a thin nose right up until I directly compared the two, that's why I didn't think it was him. McJeff 20:04, 21 January 2009 (UTC) ::So do we name the article the Mystery Jock or use the name that Scribby found. Dan the Man 1983 21:06, 21 January 2009 (UTC) :::I think we should leave the Two mystery jocks article up, but create an article for Bob. McJeff 21:26, 21 January 2009 (UTC) ::::I don't see the point in that since the confirmation of who they are. Dan the Man 1983 21:50, 21 January 2009 (UTC) :::::Mainly because even though we know it, we had to mess around with data files to find out. Most bully players won't have done that and won't know who those two random jocks are. McJeff 22:00, 21 January 2009 (UTC) ::::::Good point. Dan the Man 1983 22:02, 21 January 2009 (UTC) Hiatus again. This time on Saturday, I will be in London until Monday. So I won't be away long this time. Dan the Man 1983 21:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC) When a user is blocked permanently. We should make it a policy to protect their user and talk pages. The only thing they can do is contact us. Dan the Man 1983 19:42, 22 January 2009 (UTC) :According to Wikipedia policy, talk pages shouldn't be locked unless the banned editor uses them to be disruptive. Which Paul was. McJeff 19:48, 22 January 2009 (UTC) ::Speaking of blocking people, I have made a decision already about the IP I gave a trial too. Dan the Man 1983 20:10, 22 January 2009 (UTC) Reply about IP's I am okay with you blocking without warning dude. Especially when they ignore the warnings in the text. It's just that Wikia has a policies on blocking. They advise administrators to warn people before blocking them. However we should make it a policy for me, you and Jessica to block IP's and users without warning who add more quotes. 24 hours seems a reasonable amount of time. Dan the Man 1983 06:14, 28 January 2009 (UTC) :I have blocked 2 IP's in the past 24 hours for 1 day for quote adding. :In my opinion those messages telling people in text not add more quotes should count as official warnings. :In fact we should add on and state that they are official warnings. Dan the Man 1983 20:17, 30 January 2009 (UTC) Just a question. Is there any point to edit that on Paul's old user page? I mean if someone wants to know why he was blocked, they can just look in the Block log. Dan the Man 1983 17:52, 29 January 2009 (UTC) :Even if I want to check the block log it takes me like 5 minutes to find it. I think we should have the details on what each banned user did to get banned. Wikipedia keeps a list of banned users - I just think it's better to use their talkpages since there's only 2 banned users and the GirlLoverVandal. McJeff 19:23, 29 January 2009 (UTC) ::Okay but remember Wikia is not Wikipedia, although we do follow examples from there, or we seem too. Dan the Man 1983 19:33, 29 January 2009 (UTC) :::I know it's not Wikipedia, but the Wikipedia policies are generally sound - the problem with Wikipedia is the automatons they call admins who can't enforce them right. Unless there's something specific we need to do differently, no harm in using Wikipedia's rules as our base. McJeff 19:34, 29 January 2009 (UTC) ::::I never liked most of Wikipedia's policies, part the reason I left. Dan the Man 1983 19:40, 29 January 2009 (UTC) :::::Anyways I made a category like Wikipedia has on banned users. Dan the Man 1983 19:41, 29 January 2009 (UTC) Just need clarification on somehing. But you blocked 201.62.210.185 for 3 days for ban dodging right? What was the other IP that user was blocked under? Dan the Man 1983 02:15, 4 February 2009 (UTC) :202.172.115.200. Both added quotes to Fatty. McJeff 03:13, 4 February 2009 (UTC) ::Okay there is a problem here, the IP was not ban dodging since the first ban ran out when he made that edit. ::I blocked that adddress on the 30th for 1 day only. Dan the Man 1983 03:19, 4 February 2009 (UTC) :::Fine. I protected the Fatty article. McJeff 03:21, 4 February 2009 (UTC) ::::No worries dude. I know how you get fed up of people adding quotes. Dan the Man 1983 03:22, 4 February 2009 (UTC) Just a question about Vance. What does Vance do or say that makes you think he is a high ranked Greaser? Dan the Man 1983 09:59, 4 February 2009 (UTC) :We won't agree on this dude, and I don't think we ever will. You're going think he is a high ranking member and I will always think he isn't. :So I have done this, since we are both stubborn and will edit war over this. We should compromise and decide what to put there as information. Dan the Man 1983 10:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC) ::Dude the only information you have is that he has more speaking lines then Ricky, Hal, Lefty and Lucky. All that means is that he has bigger role in the game then them. It does not mean authority with in the clique or that he is a highly ranked member of the clique. Dan the Man 1983 15:32, 4 February 2009 (UTC) :::I guess your meaning the time where he told Jimmy that they don't respect him anymore, even after saving Johnny from the asylum? If so, speaking for your own clique is natural if someone disrespects them. It means something yes, respect for his own, not authority. :::In all honesty when it comes to stating authority, I think we should really only state what has been stated elsewhere, like game data files and game guides. It makes it easier here in the long run, rather then dispute every time when me and you disagree. I am sick of disputing with you dude, I don't like it, but I only do it if I disagree with you. Dan the Man 1983 15:51, 4 February 2009 (UTC)